Dick Allen

QUOTE(henry wiggins @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 03:12 PM) I would bet that sports writers, in the course of their daily job, hear a LOT of things from players, coaches and managers that are kind of ... icky. Epithets, names called. Not so much in hate, as in the jock-speak of the locker room, where crudity is the standard order. Worse than the trading floors where I work, even. So, why aren't sports writers telling us EVERY SINGLE TIME a player, coach or manager uses a vulgar or derogatory term? I want to know! I want only Eagle Scouts to play pro sports, and I want EVERYONE who isn't clean in thought, word and deed OUT OF THE GAME! Oh, and in the Series last year, the Astros manager called Joe Crede a 5-letter word that is a slang term for female genitalia -- this after Crede barked at a pitcher who hit him. Garner was impugning Crede's masculinity. Well, as a woman, I am hugely offended by that and I want Garner and the Astros to apologize to me and to all women! (Do I have to green this post?) The difference is Ozzie did this specifically into a microphone. You're right, you will hear a lot worse than what Ozzie said in a clubhouse or during the course of a game, or if you hear an argument with an umpire. I was sitting in the first row of the upper deck back in the mid 80s when Roger Clemens was pitching against the White Sox. Someone hit a slow roller to first and Clemens ran over to cover the bag, the guy was clearly out but the umpire called him safe. Clemens lost his mind. From the first row of the upper deck I clearly could hear him tell the umpire that his mother was a whore, with a few f-bombs added in. Don Baylor and Jim Rice both huge guys grabbed him and carried him off the field.

Whatever the term means in Venezuela doesn't apply here. You can smoke dope and eat mushrooms and pay for hookers in Amsterdam. If your caught with that stuff here you can't use it for an excuse. Ozzie was dead wrong. Marriotti is an ass. This is exactly what he wanted. Now Jay, the guy who could never throw a ball or hit one, or make a basket or shoot a puck is now a sports story. If it gets anyone connected to the White Sox in hot water, even better as far as he's concerned. The White Sox should make it a team policy not to comment on anything Marriotti says or writes. His columns and comments speak for themselves. They show he knows nothing about sports.

I wonder what the White Sox think of the flagship station giving Marriotti airtime to bash some more, and try to get people to feel sorry for him.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 10:53 AM) THis is basically his attitude: "They dont like me, so I am going to take them down with my pen" yea, and he calls OZZIE immature. Ozzie is immature, as is Marriotti. There's a long line of athletes that don't like Marriotti. Every franchise in this town hates him. I really doubt there any athletes or executives of professional teams in this town that even remotely like him.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 10:48 AM) "It's not fair to me when their broadcaster sits in the booth and rips on me." You have been ripping on them for YEARS! They can just stay there and not retaliate after YEARS of abuse. True. Its not fair of Marriotti to write the lies he's written about the White Sox organization for years. Does anyone remember one of the Tribune's blogs last October which summarized Marriotti's negative White Sox columns? It was hysterical and showed what a worthless writer and observer he his.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 10:43 AM) Basically, it's wrong to do what Ozzie did. I dont go into the clubhouse because of a long standing fued with former players. I have no interst in going in here. I am a coolumnist and not a beat writer. I can say what I want. He also said the way Ozzie acted is symptomatic of the whole organization. They have a beef with me and don't like me. That's the problem with this whole thing. Marriotti gets to play the victim when he's been angling for this for years.

QUOTE(lukeman89 @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 10:26 AM) will ozzie be disciplined for this? Its possible he would be fined IMO. Ozzie is a very immature man. I think its safe to say that. His act flies because the White Sox are winning. If the Sox were playing like the other team in town, the act would have gotten old long ago. That said, and while I cringe everytime Ozzie defends his mistakes by talking about what he said or does means in Venezuela, he's not in Venezuela, things are different here, he took the bait by a guy trying to get a reaction just like this. Marriotti won, and will continue to pull strings to get these types of reactions. If calling Marriotti a "***" gets people in an uproar, how come that song with Sting and the guy from Dire Straits, using the words "little f*****" didn't produce protests? I would imagine at least 95% of the guys on this board have called people ***s in their life, knowing damn well the object of their name calling was straight. I can see where calling Marriotti a *** is an insult to ***s everywhere. Ozzie shouldn't pop off, but he did. There's really nothing that can be done about it now.

QUOTE(CanOfCorn @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 09:54 AM) That's the kind of thing I was talking about. The Tigers are playing great, but against sub-par competition. The Sox have taken the Indians, Tigers, Rangers, Reds and now game 1 of the Cards series and stayed right with them, and the only way the Tigers gained ground was on an off-day. I mean, the Brewers are improved, but they aren't the Cardinals...and the Sox dropped a 20-spot on them. At least up until a couple of weeks ago, the White Sox played a weaker schedule than Detroit. I find this talk that the White Sox continuing to win is bothering Detroit, pretty funny. They continue to win as well. There were several on here that said the Tigers would fade in June and wouldn't be .500. They would have to lose the next 8 for that to happen. Dye, Konerko, Thome, Crede, and AJP are performing much higher offensively than what could be expected. I doubt they will continue with their torrid pace. Detroit is a good team and they're most likely for real. There haven't been many frauds that got to 24 over .500. Let's not talk about the Cardinals without Puhjols as one of the better teams in baseball. The Cubs kicked them all over the place. These are both good teams, and it probably will come down to who can remain healthier, and what kind of adjustments are made before the trade deadline.

I've always thought of LaRussa as a punk. I never liked him and was glad when Hawk canned him in 1986. He didn't, however, order any hit batters last night. In fact, he was pissed about it. You could tell from the post game show that he thought it was intentional. Ponson told him it wasn't, so he was standing behind that, but his stance was a little wobbly. I think his quote was, "It looked like crap."

My take is the White Sox as an organization had taken the high road on Marriotti for years until Hawk decided enough is enough, and started calling Marriotti out in defense of JR. Marriotti knows damn well what he's doing, and now has the Sox playing into his hand by popping off at every negative article. As the saying goes, there's no such thing as bad publicity. More people read Marriotti's column because of the White Sox reaction. Unfortunately, Marriotti isn't like a little kid who will stop his act once he realizes he isn't getting his desired attention. And while I agree with Flash for the most part, (I have heard the same words Ozzie used to describe people thousands of times in my life) the White Sox are taking a risk of making Marriotti a sympathetic figure. That would be pathetic. Although I understand the comments, and if I was in the same situation, would be hard-pressed not to say anything, I think the Sox would be better off just ignoring anything Marriotti.

Smoltz was on ESPN seemingly endorsing a trade to Detroit. He has veto power on all deals. Someone at ESPN was speculating that Scherholtz and Cox would likely sit down with Smoltz, and if he wanted out would probably grant his request due to all he's done for the Braves, and the fact that the Braves look to be entering a rebuilding faze and Smoltz is getting up there in years. There has been speculation of a Smoltz/Zumaya trade which looks like a decent deal for the Braves, especially since they aren't going to win anything this season but it also would solidify the Detroit rotation. The Sox don't want to fall too far behind Detroit. They will spend lots of money reinforcing their team.

QUOTE(Linnwood @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 04:24 AM) I can't say this enough: Please need to sit down and watch the flippin' game. This is my biggest complaint about these areas... and it is the same people every five minutes getting up to get s***. :banghead Its one of the biggest reasons I moved to the Club level several years ago. It amazes me how much money people spend at baseball games. They spend the majority of their time at concession and souvenir stands, and then walk back blocking your view when you want to watch a game. There are at least a few people that realize they are inconveniencing people standing in the aisle, but most just don't care. The other problem is if you happen to sit on an aisle, the people in the middle of the section have to buy something from every vendor in the park. You spend a lot of time passing money, beer, hot dogs, cotton candy, and sodas around.

QUOTE(SoxAce @ Jun 21, 2006 -> 12:25 AM) Where's Tracey when we need him.. That was an unbelievable offensive display. At one point 9 out of 10 guys got hits. It was obvious what Riske's job was since Cotts was warming up hard the previous half inning and in between innings. He sat down once the inning started, but was obviously getting ready to go in after an ejection. I'm surprised they didn't use steroid boy Montero for the retaliation, considering the Sox wouldn't be hurt by a suspension to him. They actually would be helped, as Ozzie couldn't use him. Maybe Ozzie learned his lesson with Tracey, and didn't want a rookie to go out there and fail.

John Rooney must be stopped from saying " that's a Cardinals winner" until at least Friday.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 03:47 PM) I think most ISU fans in the state are thrilled and quite a few Hawk fans will be pissed. A lot of people thought he turned the corner in the Big 10 this year, but the failure to beat any team named Northwestern hangs over his head. Now I just hope McDermott is as good of a coach as everyone seems to think he is. A part of me still hates him. A couple of tough losses to Northwestern in consecutive years hurts. Winning the Big 10 Tournament took a lot of the sting out of those losses however.

I'm an Iowa alum and was an Alford backer until Pierce let him down the second time. I wanted him gone, but he's changed his staff, and suddenly is recruiting better players. I actually have optimism about the Iowa program again. I think he's learned from his mistakes. Now if he could only get his players to be able to shoot like him.

QUOTE(chitownsportsfan @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 03:04 PM) Jesus man, The Trib owns the Cubs--even if they did try and "skew" the coverage to "distance" the murder from the ballclub, it's like, "gee, who could have seen that one coming"? THEY OWN THE TEAM. You just made my point. That's why the coverage is always going to be uneven. How come the guy who murdered someone in front of that dump not as well known as Ligue? How come that girl who threw a ball at Jacques Jones was not prosecuted, and outed by the media? Even poor Bartman was outed, because he "screwed" the Cubs. People were threatening his life and news crews were outside his house, making it easier for some sicko to do something. Last week someone ran onto the field at Wrigley. No mention anywhere. If it happened at USCF, you could bet it would be on WGN news, radio and the Tribune. Even the Tribune's writers see the conflict of interest here and wouldn't mind the Tribune selling the Cubs. If they did, I'd bet my life you'd see a whole different looking sports section if these teams continued to perform as they are performing. The problem is, its not in the Tribune Co.'s best interests to be reporting the truth right now ie pro-Sox, anti-Cubs, due to all of their holdings. The other thing is that the Tribune would never acknowledge the conflict of interest, and will always stand by the line that they cover each team equally.

QUOTE(chitownsportsfan @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 02:27 PM) That doesn't make any sense to me. Those terms, "profits", and "newspapers sold" enjoy a correlation, whereas you make it seem like they are mutually exclusive. And then, when you say, "A few more subscriptions on the SS won't change the bottom line", you're providing evidence for my argument: the Tribune caters to the more affluent Northside, the CUBS fans, in order to sell newspapers and raise advertising rates. You're correct when you say that wealthy demographics bring wealthy advertisers, which is exactly why the CUBS are featured more prominently. As for the study, I'd have to personally review it before I draw any conclusions. Data can be manipulated, and "average" can be easily thrown out of wack by outliers. I believe you can get the Tribune for approx. $2-3 a week with a subscription. Even if their circulation was 5 million which I doubt, $10 million is not exactly that much money to the Tribune Co. It is more important for them who its circulated to, than how many its circulated to. The circulation number is important to a point,obviously. But its much better for them to circulate 20,000 in Winnetka than 40,000 in Englewood.

QUOTE(Muscatel @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 02:18 PM) I found Hangar’s count to be inaccurate on other occasions when he was doing his media watch on WSI. But I also question some of his other claims about bias and how the “Cubune” frequently buries negative stories about the Cubs. That came up yesterday, when either Hangar or one of his supporters mentioned the murder of the fan outside Wrigley Field as evidence, noting that the paper uses “Lakeview” instead of “Wrigleyville” to protect the franchise. So, on company time, I went to the library today to check it out. The shooting took place on Thursday, May 6, 2004. In Friday’s paper, a story appeared on the front page of the Tribune Metro section, not on page 5 as someone said yesterday. The headline said “Pedestrian fatally shot near Wrigley.” On Saturday, May 8, the Tribune had a front-page story – front page of the newspaper, not the Metro section -- with two photos and a graphic showing where it happened and the headline was “Suspect charged in killing near Wrigley.” In scanning the story, “Wrigleyville” was mentioned at least four times and I didn’t see “Lakeview” once. Note: I only scanned the story quickly, so I’m not claiming this is fact. On Sunday, May 9, a story on the front of the Metro section said “Volatile mix at Wrigley a worry,” and the story talked about all the drinkers in the neighborhood after games and the problems they can create. Now, I saw “Lakeview” used twice in that story, but one of them was a direct quote from someone from Citizens United for Baseball in Sunshine, a group opposed to night games at Wrigley. That means some people in the neighborhood call it “Lakeview” too. Rick Morrissey also had a column on the front of the Sunday Sports section under the head “Wrigleyville a neighborhood, not a theme park” That’s four stories in three days, all prominently displayed. I don’t see that as an attempt by the Tribune to bury a negative story about the Cubs. I was looking at Chicago city editions, so story placement may have been different in suburban editions – where people expect to see news about their suburbs. Were the stories biased in the way they were written, worded to protect the company’s image? That’s something individual readers have to decide (sorry, I can’t reproduce the stories here). Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and when the beholder is as hell-bent as Hangar is to prove his point, then only a fool would take what he says as gospel. It’s his perception, and that perception may be warped by things that none of us know anything about. I don't have time to check all of Hangar's alleged "facts," so I guess the best thing is to treat them for what they are -- rants. I live in the city and it was on page 5 of the metro section the second half of a story from page 1 of the metro section, and there was no headline mentioning the murder at all. The story was buried and that burial was a big topic of conversation on sports radio.

QUOTE(chitownsportsfan @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 12:15 PM) I really can't stand complaints about the mainstream media. If it bothers you, ignore it. The fact that there are more Cubs stories on average than White Sox ones isn't some grand conspiracy to keep the White Sox down, but is entirely due to the fact that the Cubs are more popular and thus more likely to sell newspapers. The Tribune Company's job is to sell newspapers. The sports page isn't hard news, they don't even need the pretense of objectity. The Tribune Company's job is not to sell newspapers, its to make profits. Coming up with a couple thousand more subscriptions from a non-affluent part of the city on the southside is not going to change their advertising rates, and certainly will not make a dent in their bottom line. The Tribune caters to the affluent, which probably don't make up the majority of their readers, but are the force that their advertisers want to advertise to. Its one of the reasons the notion that the rich and beautiful go to Wrigley and the poor and uneducated go to USCF has been around. It may shock you to learn, after we have had this beat into our heads for years that a study was done last year, and the average White Sox fan actually was slightly higher educated and earned slightly more money than the average Cub fan. With the Cubs being under the Tribune Co.'s umbrella, there is no way they would ever make the White Sox the media darlings of Chicago. Have you seen the baseball commercial on WGN? The World Champion White Sox, and the world renowned Cubs? Ridiculous. They haven't been as over-the-top unfair recently, but if for some reason the Cubs won the WS last year, and the Sox had the Cubs record this year, the White Sox would be as insignificant in the Tribune as the Blackhawks. The WS parade shocked a lot of people last year. There are far more people that care about the White Sox than even the White Sox knew.

QUOTE(SnB @ Jun 20, 2006 -> 01:32 PM) forecast doesn't look awful http://wwwa.accuweather.com/forecast-hourl...etric=0&whend=1 Neither does the radar, they'll get this game in I think its supposed to rain this afternoon, but should be ok this evening.

Vazquez is something like 1-6 lifetime against STL. Its time he turn the tide. The TOR/ATL matchup tonight features Towers 1-8 vs. Sosa 1-9. Watch it be a 2-1 game.

I still don't understand why the Player's Association and the league didn't make the slotting of signing bonuses an issue in collective bargaining.They should also allow trading of draft picks. Make it like the NBA. If you get picked in this slot your bonus is between this and this. It would make more money available to players who have already established themselves. It would prevent guys like Boras from ruining the draft. The draft would be more heavily based on talent, not signability. The Borchard signing obviously was ridiculous. This kid has nothing to lose either, as if he decides to play football a year from now he'll walk away with close to $1 million. Not a bad summer job.

This notion that the Tribune bases everything it does on its customer base is absurd. The Tribune routinely endorses Republican political candidates, almost always the Republican candidate for President, and in its circulation area, the Democratic candidate usually gets more votes. The company has used its newspaper, its sports section in particular, as an advertisement for another branch of its companies. To say there have been more Cub stories than Sox stories in that particular paper over the years, and the reason is the Cubs are more popular is BS. If anything, the exposure has made them more popular. Isn't one of the reasons the Sox popularity was not what it used to be blamed on its leaving WGN(yet another Tribune Co.) many years ago? As far as why the Sun-Times would have the same discrepancy, the Tribune is the big fish, they have to follow, although I really doubt there is a high percentage of people who purchase a newspaper based on Cubs vs. Sox content. At least they offer a more objective perspective on issues such as Ligue, the murder at Clark and Addison actually rated a headline from them, and they were a lot more objective than the Tribune when Wrigley Field starting crumbling down. The Sox are always going to be a little behind with the Cubs a sister company of a newspaper, television station and radio station. All three have bent over backwards promoting this team and its home for the past 22 years. People are getting sick of Wood, Prior, they tired of Sosa, but they will never get sick of that dump they play in. The Sox have closed the gap, and the newspapers have to, and apparently have at least a little bit, responded, as hangar's numbers lately have been pretty even, but with the Tribune's entire media machine running on all cylinders, I think the Cubs could lose 100 games a year for the next 20 years and on a July day in 2027 Wrigley Field would be packed for yet another meaningless major league game played on the north side of Chicago.

This will give the Sox ample opportunity for some retaliation. Its time Barrett goes down.